Holographic characterization of protein aggregates

ABSTRACT

Systems and methods for holographic characterization of protein aggregates. Size and refractive index of individual aggregates in a solution can be determined. Information regarding morphology and porosity can be extracted from holographic data.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is the U.S. national phase of International Application No. PCT/US2017/016857 filed Feb. 7, 2017, which claims priority to and benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 62/292,842 filed Feb. 8, 2016, the entire disclosures of which are incorporated herein by reference.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Proteins and protein aggregates are increasingly important for commercial applications. Characterization of protein aggregates provides a challenge, particular for large-scale implementation and with regard to real-time or near real-time characterization. The tendency of proteins to aggregate into clusters is a major concern in manufacturing protein-based bio-pharmaceuticals and assessing their safety. In addition to reducing therapeutic efficacy, protein aggregates elicit immune responses that result in clinical adverse events with the potential to compromise the health of affected individuals. Detecting, counting and characterizing protein aggregates is essential to understanding the critical pathways responsible for protein aggregation. Established particle characterization technologies such as dynamic light scattering work well for in situ characterization of sub-micrometer-scale aggregates. Others, such as micro-flow imaging, work best for visible aggregates larger than five micrometers or so. Comparatively few established techniques probe the subvisible range from 100 nm to 10 μm. The need for enhanced characterization techniques is particularly acute in applications that require real-time monitoring of subvisible aggregates in their native environment.

The tendency of proteins to cluster and the ability to detect and characterize such is an important consideration. There exists a need for systems and methods to accurately and quickly characterize proteins.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

One embodiment relates to a method of characterizing a sample of plurality of protein aggregates. The method includes flowing the sample through an observation volume of a holographic microscope. A first set of holograms is generated based upon holographic video microscopy of a first set of protein aggregates within the observation volume at a first time. Each of the protein aggregates of the first set of protein aggregate is modeled as a sphere. The refractive index and the radius for each of the protein aggregates of the first set of protein aggregates is determined. A second set of holograms is generated based upon holographic video microscopy of a second set of protein aggregates within the observation volume at a second time. Each of the protein aggregates of the second set of protein aggregate is modeled as a sphere. The refractive index and the radius are determined for each of the protein aggregates of the second set of protein aggregates.

Another embodiment relates to a method of characterizing a plurality of protein aggregates. Holograms of protein aggregates of the plurality of protein aggregates are generated, each hologram based upon holographic video microscopy of a protein aggregate P_(N) of the plurality of protein aggregates at a time T_(N). The refractive index and the radius of the protein aggregate P_(N) are determined at the time T_(N). The change in the plurality of protein aggregates over time is characterized based upon the determined refractive index and radius of the particles.

Another embodiment relates to a computer-implemented machine for characterizing a plurality of protein aggregates, comprising: a processor, a holographic microscope comprising a coherent light, a specimen stage having an observation volume, an objective lens, and an image collection device. The holographic microscope is in communication with the processor. The system further comprises a tangible computer-readable medium operatively connected to the processor and including computer code. The computer code is configured to: control the flow of the sample through an observation volume of the holographic microscope; receive a first set of holograms based upon holographic video microscopy of a first set of protein aggregates within the observation volume at a first time; model each of the protein aggregates of the first set of protein aggregate as a sphere; determine the refractive index and the radius for each of the protein aggregates of the first set of protein aggregates; receive a second set of holograms based upon holographic video microscopy of a second set of protein aggregates within the observation volume at a second time; model each of the protein aggregates of the second set of protein aggregate as a sphere; and determine the refractive index and the radius for each of the protein aggregates of the second set of protein aggregates.

The foregoing summary is illustrative only and is not intended to be in any way limiting. In addition to the illustrative aspects, embodiments, and features described above, further aspects, embodiments, and features will become apparent by reference to the following drawings and the detailed description.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The foregoing and other features of the present disclosure will become more fully apparent from the following description and appended claims, taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings. Understanding that these drawings depict only several embodiments in accordance with the disclosure and are, therefore, not to be considered limiting of its scope, the disclosure will be described with additional specificity and detail through use of the accompanying drawings.

FIG. 1A illustrates a measured holograph of a 1 micrometer diameter BSA aggregate. FIG. 1B illustrates a fit based upon Lorenz-Mie theory of light scattering.

FIG. 2 shows protein aggregates flowing down a microfluidic channel form holograms as they pass through a laser beam. A typical experimental hologram is reproduced as a grayscale image in the figure. Each hologram is recorded by a video camera and compared with predictions of Lorenz-Mie theory to measure each aggregate's radius, a_(p), and refractive index, n_(p). The inset scatter plot shows experimental data for 3000 subvisible aggregates of bovine insulin, with each data point representing the properties of a single aggregate, and colors denoting the relative probability density p(a_(p), n_(p)) for observations in the (a_(p), n_(p)) plane.

FIG. 3A is a scatter plot of radius a_(p) and refractive index n_(p) obtained with holographic characterization of a heterogeneous colloidal dispersion composed of a mixture of four different types of particles. Results for 20,000 particles are plotted. Superimposed crosses indicate the manufacturer's specification for each of the four populations. These results establish holographic characterization's ability to differentiate particles by composition as well as by size. FIG. 3B shows measured holograms of colloidal polystyrene spheres in water together with fits, demonstrating the range of particle sizes amenable to holographic characterization. These typical examples were obtained for spheres with radii a_(p)=0.237 mm (224 pixel×224 pixel region of interest), 0.800 mm (356 pixel×356 pixel), and 10.47 mm (608 pixel×608 pixel). The fit to each hologram yields values for the particle's radius, a_(p), and refractive index, n_(p). Radial profiles, b(r), are obtained from these holograms and their fits by averaging the normalized intensity over angles around the center of each feature, and are plotted as a function of distance r from the center of the feature. Experimental data are plotted as darker (blue) curves within shaded regions representing the measurement's uncertainty at that radius. Fits are superimposed as lighter (orange) curves and closely track the experimental data.

FIGS. 4A-4D show the influence of aggregate morphology on holographic characterization. Holograms of typical aggregates arranged in order of increasing discrepancy between measured and fit holograms. FIG. 4A shows 160 pixel×160 pixel regions of interest from the microscope's field of view, centered on features automatically identified as candidate BSA-PAH complexes. FIG. 4B shows fits to the Lorenz-Mie theory for holograms formed by spheres. FIG. 4C shows radial profiles of the experimental hologram (black curves) overlaid with the radial profile of the fits (red curves). Shaded regions represent the estimated experimental uncertainty. FIG. 4D shows Rayleigh-Sommerfeld reconstructions of the aggregates' three-dimensional structures obtained from the experimental holograms. Grayscale images are projections of the reconstructions, which resemble equivalent bright-field images at optimal focus. Superimposed circles indicate fit estimates for the particle size.

FIGS. 5A-5F illustrate the impact of contaminants on the measured distribution of the radius a_(p) and refractive index n_(p) of BSA-PAH complexes. FIG. 5A (refractive index) and FIG. 5B (size distribution) illustrate results for BSA complexed with PAH in Tris buffer (1100 aggregates). FIG. 5C (refractive index) and FIG. 5D (size distribution) illustrate results for same sample of FIGS. 5A and 5B but with 0.1 M NaCl (1200 aggregates); FIG. 5E (refractive index) and FIG. 5F (size distribution) illustrate results for a sample prepared under the same conditions as FIGS. 5C and 5D with added silicone spheres (1600 features). Each point in the scatter plots (FIGS. 5A, 5C, and 5E) represents the properties of a single aggregate and is colored by the relative density of observations, p(a_(p), n_(p)). FIGS. 5B, 5D, and 5F present the associated size distribution p(a_(p)) within a shaded region representing the instrumental and statistical error

FIG. 6A shows combined data for all three BSA samples. FIG. 6B shows data rescaled according to Equation 4.

FIG. 7 illustrates a computer system for use with certain implementations.

FIGS. 8A-8B show a comparison of size distributions measured with microflow imaging and holographic characterization. Each bin represents the number of particles per milliliter of solution in a range of ±100 nm about the bin's central radius. FIG. 8A shows a sample without added salt (sample of FIGS. 5A-5B). FIG. 8B shows a sample with added NaCL (sample of FIGS. 5C-5D).

FIG. 9 shows a characterization of BSA-PAH complexes by dynamic light scattering (DLS). Values represent the percentage, P(a_(h)), of the scattered light's intensity due to scatterers of a given hydrodynamic radius, ah. The arrow indicates a small peak in both distributions around ah ¼ 2.8 mm.

FIGS. 10A and 10B show holographic characterization data for silicone spheres dispersed in deionized water. The gray-shaded region denotes the range of refractive indexes expected for these particles based on their composition. FIG. 10A shows a monodisperse sample (600 spheres). FIG. 10B shows a polydisperse sample (600 spheres).

FIGS. 11A-11D show holographic measurement of the relative probability density, r(a_(p), n_(p)), of particle radius and refractive index for suspensions BSA-PAH complexes spiked with added silicone spheres. FIG. 11A shows a sample prepared under the same conditions as in FIGS. 5A-5B spiked with the monodisperse spheres from FIG. 10A (2000 features). FIG. 11B shows a sample prepared under the same conditions as in FIG. 5C-5D spiked with the polydisperse spheres from FIG. 10B (1600 features). FIGS. 11C and 11D show the projected relative probability density, r(a_(p)), for particle radius from the data in FIG. 11A and FIG. 11B, respectively.

FIGS. 12A-12C illustrate results showing the distinguishing of protein and silicone oil separately: FIG. 12A shows 1 mg/mL in Human IgG PBS buffer, FIG. 12B shows 3 mg/mL silicone oil in PBS buffer. These samples were mixed together as shown in FIG. 12C, with final concentrations of 0.5 mg/mL Human IgG and 1.5 mg/mL of silicone oil in PBS buffer. All measurements were done using a 40× objective (Nikon 0.75NA) and a 100 μm depth microfluidic channel (μ-Slide VI 0.1 Uncoated)

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

In the following detailed description, reference is made to the accompanying drawings, which form a part hereof. In the drawings, similar symbols typically identify similar components, unless context dictates otherwise. The illustrative embodiments described in the detailed description, drawings, and claims are not meant to be limiting. Other embodiments may be utilized, and other changes may be made, without departing from the spirit or scope of the subject matter presented here. It will be readily understood that the aspects of the present disclosure, as generally described herein, and illustrated in the figures, can be arranged, substituted, combined, and designed in a wide variety of different configurations, all of which are explicitly contemplated and made part of this disclosure.

Holographic characterization of fractal protein aggregates yields insights into the size and refractive index of individual aggregates in solution. Single-aggregate characterization data can be combined into the joint distribution for size and refractive index in a dispersion of aggregates, without a priori assumptions about the nature of the distribution. Interpreting the measured size-index joint distribution for an ensemble of protein aggregates in terms of an effective-medium model for scattering by fractal aggregates yields an estimate for the aggregates' mean fractal dimension, and therefore their morphology. When this interpretation is applied to dispersions of aggregated bovine serum albumin, the extracted fractal dimension, D=1.2 agrees with previous reports based on ex situ measurement techniques such as electron microscopy and atomic force microscopy. The success of this population-averaged scaling analysis lends confidence to the single-aggregate characterization data on which it is based, and thus to the novel proposal that holographic characterization can be used to analyze the size, structure and morphology of micrometer-scale protein aggregates.

The tendency of proteins to aggregate into clusters is implicated in disease processes, and also affects the efficacy of protein-based pharmaceuticals. Here, a method is introduced based on holographic video microscopy for detecting, counting and characterizing individual protein aggregates that rapidly builds up population statistics on subvisible aggregates in solution in their natural state, without dilution or special solvent conditions, and without the need for chemical or optical labels. The use of holographic video microscopy, including Lorenz-Mie analysis is known for the characterization of spherical homogenous particles. Protein aggregates present a unique challenge in that they are both not homogenous and not spherical. Protein aggregates tend to be irregularly shaped, and can be highly branched spindly structures. Described herein are systems and methods that utilize a determination of the properties of an effective sphere, one that includes the aggregate and the surrounding and interstitial fluid medium. The estimates of radius and refractive index of this defined sphere are then adjusted to those of the actual protein aggregate through the use of modeling, such as the fractal model. In one application, the systems and methods are utilized without characterization of the materials, but rather to provide information regarding “counting” of the protein aggregates in their native environment, in one embodiment in near real time.

The proof of concept examples of this method are made through measurements on aggregates of bovine serum albumin (BSA) and bovine insulin (BI) over the range of radii from 300 nm to 10 μm. Accumulating particle-resolved measurements into joint distributions for the aggregates' size and refractive index offers insights into the influence of growth conditions on the mechanism of protein aggregation. A scaling analysis of this joint distribution yields estimates for the aggregates' fractal dimension that are consistent with previous ex situ measurements and so offers insights into the aggregates' morphology. The success of this scaling analysis suggests that the results for single-cluster sizes and refractive indexes accurately reflect the properties of the individual aggregates.

The measurement technique, such as the embodiment of FIG. 2, is based on in-line holographic video microscopy a technique that creates holograms of individual objects in the microscope's field of view. A holographic microscope illuminates its sample with a collimated laser beam rather than a conventional incoherent light source. Light scattered by a small object, such as a protein aggregate, therefore interferes with the remainder of the beam in the focal plane of an optical microscope. The microscope magnifies the interference pattern and projects it onto the face of a video camera, which records the spatially varying intensity pattern, l(r). Each image in the resulting video stream is a holographic snapshot of the scatterers passing through the laser beam, and can be analyzed with predictions based on the Lorenz-Mie theory of light scattering to measure each aggregate's radius a_(p), refractive index, n_(p), and three-dimensional position, r_(p). Holographic characterization originally was developed for analyzing spherical particles (see, e.g., Lee S H, Roichman Y, Yi G R, Kim S H, Yang S M, van Blaaderen A, et al. Characterizing and tracking single colloidal particles with video holographic microscopy. Opt Express. 2007; 15:18275-18282, incorporated herein by reference). Rigorously generalizing the analysis to account for the detailed structure of aspherical and inhomogeneous objects is prohibitively slow because of the analytical complexity and the associated computational burden. The idealized spherical model is used to characterize protein aggregates with the understanding that the results should be interpreted as referring to an effective sphere comprising both the protein aggregate and the fluid medium that fills out the effective sphere.

FIG. 2 illustrates a protein aggregates flowing down a microfluidic channel form holograms as they pass through a laser beam. A typical experimental hologram is reproduced as a grayscale image in the figure. Each hologram is recorded by a video camera and compared with predictions of Lorenz-Mie theory to measure each aggregate's radius, a_(p), and refractive index, n_(p). The scatter plot shows experimental data for 3000 subvisible aggregates of bovine insulin, with each data point representing the properties of a single aggregate, and colors denoting the relative probability density p(a_(p), n_(p)) for observations in the (a_(p), n_(y)) plane.

In one embodiment, the holographic characterization system and methods provide for detection of protein aggregates having a radius in of an acceptable size range, such as within the range of 200 nm (300 nm, 400 nm, 500 nm) to 20 μm (10 μm, 1 μm, 900 nm, 800 nm). Further, embodiments enable counting of protein aggregates within the size range, allowing determination of the number density of the protein aggregates (in the size range). In addition, the systems and methods allow for identification of protein aggregates within sub-ranges of the acceptable size range. Some techniques, such as dynamic light scattering (DLS) cover the lower end of the same size range and can probe particles that are smaller. Other techniques, such as microflow imaging (MFI) operate at the upper end of the same size range, and can probe particles that are still larger. The present approach to holographic characterization bridges the operating domains of these other techniques. The specified range reflects the current implementation and can be extended through the choice of optical hardware and through modification of the software used to analyze holograms. The lower end of the range is limited also by the wavelength of light. The upper end of the range is not fundamentally limited in this way, but can be limited in practice by considerations of computational complexity.

In order to accomplish the holographic characterization, in one embodiment the system and methods characterize protein aggregates in the acceptable size range. Characterization includes: a) measuring the radius with Lorenz-Mie analysis; b) measuring the effective refractive index of the aggregate with Lorenz-Mie analysis; c) estimating the porosity of an individual aggregate based on its effective refractive index relative to that of the protein itself; d) estimating the mean porosity of an ensemble of aggregates based on the shape of the distribution of single-particle characterization data (using Eq. (1) (set forth below), assuming that the aggregates may be modeled as having a fractal geometry); e) measuring an individual aggregate's morphology based on back-propagation of the aggregate's hologram. In a further embodiment, the back-propagation step is a distinct and parallel path for analyzing the same data, and may include 1) Fresnel back-propagation, 2) Rayleigh-Sommerfeld back-propagation and/or 3) Rayleigh-Sommerfeld deconvolution. This term effective refractive index refers the refractive index of the material within a spherical volume that incorporates both the particle under study and also the medium intercalated within that particle. This “effective sphere” has a size and a refractive index that reflect the corresponding properties of the particle of interest. This particle could be a colloidal sphere, an aspherical colloidal particle, an aggregates of colloidal particles, or an aggregate of molecules such as a protein aggregate. The measured effective refractive index is neither the refractive index of the medium, nor of a pure protein cluster, but a composite of all of the components of the aggregate. When there is more solvent, incorporated in the aggregate, the effective refractive index will be closer to the solvent refractive index, and when there is less solvent, it will be further from the solvent refractive index. The effective index of refraction provides information about the proportion of the effective sphere's volume that is filled with the medium, and therefore provides useful insight into the particle's morphology.

With reference to the embodiment of FIG. 2, The holographic characterization instrument uses a conventional microscope objective lens (Nikon Plan Apo, 100×, numerical aperture 1.45, oil immersion), which, in combination with a standard tube lens, yields a system magnification of 135 nm/pixel on the face of a monochrome video camera (NEC TI-324AII). The sample is illuminated with the collimated beam from a solid state laser (Coherent Verdi) delivering 10 mW of light to the sample vacuum wavelength of 532 nm. This light is spread over the 3 mm diameter of the beam, in this example, yielding a peak irradiance of 1.5 mW/mm². For micrometer-scale colloidal spheres, this instrument can measure an individual particle's radius with nanometer precision, its refractive index to within a part per thousand, and can track its position to within a nanometer in the plane and to within 3 nanometers along the optical axis. Each fit can be performed in a fraction of a second, for example a few tens of milliseconds, using automated feature detection and image recognition algorithms. A single fit suffices to characterize a single protein aggregate.

To characterize the population of aggregates in a protein dispersion, the sample is flowed through the microscope's observation volume in a microfluidic channel. Given the camera's exposure time of 0.1 ms, results are immune to motion blurring for flow rates up to 100 μm/s. Under typical conditions, no more than ten protein aggregates pass through the 86 μm×65 μm field of view at a time. These conditions simplify the holographic analysis by minimizing overlap between individual particles' scattering patterns. Each particle typically is aggregate typically is recorded in multiple video frames as it moves through the field of view. Such sequences of measurements are linked into trajectories using a maximum-likelihood algorithm and median values are reported for each trajectory. These considerations establish an upper limit to the range of accessible aggregate concentrations of 10⁸ aggregates/ml. At the other extreme, 10 min of data suffices to detect, count and characterize aggregates at concentrations as low as 10⁴ aggregates/ml. This sensitivity compares favorably with both dynamic light scattering and nanoparticle tracking analysis. In one embodiment, a data set consisting of 5000 particles can be acquired in about 5 min.

The scatter plot inset into FIG. 2 shows typical results for subvisible aggregates of bovine insulin. Each point represents the properties of a single aggregate, and is comparable in size to the estimated errors in the radius and refractive index. Colors represent the local density p(a_(p), n_(p)) of recorded data points in the (a_(p), n_(p)) plane, computed with a kernel density estimator, with red indicating the most probable values.

Holographic characterization can be generalized to accommodate aspherical and inhomogeneous particles. The associated light-scattering calculations are computationally burdensome, however. Protein aggregates are characterized using the light-scattering theory for isotropic and homogeneous spheres with the understanding that the aggregates may depart from this idealized model. The typical example in FIG. 1, however, demonstrates that the spherical model accounts well for observed single-particle scattering patterns in the system.

Calibrating the Holographic Characterization Instrument

Holographic characterization relies on four instrumental calibration parameters: the vacuum wavelength of the laser illumination, the magnification of the optical train, the dark count of the camera, and the single-pixel signal-to-noise ratio at the operating illumination level. All of these can be measured once and then used for all subsequent analyses.

The vacuum wavelength of the laser is specified by the manufacturer and is independently verified to four significant figures using a fiber spectrometer (Ocean Optics, HR4000). The microscope's system magnification is measured to four significant figures using a precision micrometer scale (Ted Pella, catalog number 2285-16). The camera's dark count is measured by blocking the laser illumination and computing the average image value at each pixel. Image noise is estimated from holographic images with the median-absolute-deviation (MAD) metric.

In addition to these instrumental calibrations, obtaining accurate results also requires an accurate value for the refractive index of the medium at the laser wavelength and at the sample temperature. For the aqueous buffers in the present study, this value was obtained to four significant figures with an Abbe refractometer (Edmund Optics). Approximating this value with the refractive index of pure water, nm=1.335, at the measurement temperature of 21±1° C. yields systematic errors in the estimated radius and refractive index of no more than 0.1%.

Operating Range of Holographic Characterization

The operating range of the holographic characterization instrument is established by measurements on aqueous dispersions of colloidal spheres intended for use as particle size standards. The interference fringes in each particle's holograms must be separated by at least one pixel in the microscope's focal plane. This requirement is accommodated by setting the focal plane 5 μm below the glass-water interface in the sample cell. The largest accessible axial displacement is set both by the need to fit multiple concentric fringes into the camera's field of view, and also by the reduction of image contrast below the camera's noise floor. This upper limit is roughly 100 μm for this instrument. In a preferred embodiment, the samples are passed through microfluidic channels with an optical path length of 30 μm to ensure good imaging conditions for all aggregates, regardless of their height in the channel.

The lower end of the range of detectable particle sizes is limited to half the wavelength of light in the medium. Particles smaller than this yield detectable holograms, which can be fit by Lorenz-Mie theory. These fits, however, do not cleanly separate the particle size from the refractive index. If the particle's refractive index is known a priori, these measurements again can yield reliable estimates for the particle's radius. For the example embodiment, the practical lower limit is set by the 8-bit dynamic range of the camera to a_(p)>200 nm. Smaller particles' light-scattering patterns lack the contrast needed for reliable detection and characterization.

For the example embodiment, the upper size limit is set to a_(p)<10 μm by the depth of the channel. The described example setup is not expected to be able to reliably observe and correctly identify irregularly shaped protein aggregates much larger than 10 μm. Large transient aggregates are likely to be broken up by hydrodynamic shearing in the Poiseuille flow within the channel. Highly asymmetric aggregates substantially larger than the wavelength of light are likely to be misidentified as two or more distinct features by the feature-identification algorithm developed for automated holographic characterization of spheres. No effort is made to correct for this artifact, although its presence is confirmed by comparing results from holographic characterization with results obtained by reanalyzing the same data for micro-flow imaging using the methods from the next section.

Holographic Morphology Measurements

The same holograms used for holographic characterization through Lorenz-Mie analysis also can be used to visualize the three-dimensional morphology of individual aggregates through Rayleigh-Sommerfeld back-propagation with volumetric deconvolution. This technique uses the Rayleigh-Sommerfeld diffraction integral to reconstruct the volumetric light field responsible for the observed intensity distribution. The object responsible for the scattering pattern appears in this reconstruction in the form of the caustics it creates in the light field. For objects with features comparable in size to the wavelengths of light, these caustics have been shown to accurately track the position and orientation of those features in three dimensions. Deconvolving the resulting volumetric data set with the point-spread function for the Rayleigh-Sommerfeld diffraction kernel eliminates twin-image artifacts and yields a three-dimensional representation of the scatterer.

Volumetric reconstructions of protein aggregates can be projected into the imaging plane to obtain the equivalent of bright-field images in the plane of best focus. This reaps the benefit of holographic microscopy's very large effective depth of focus compared with conventional bright-field microscopy. The resulting images are useful for micro-flow imaging analysis, including analysis of protein aggregates' morphology. This information, in turn, can be used to assess the rate of false feature identifications in the Lorenz-Mie analysis, and thus the rate at which larger aggregates are misidentified as clusters of smaller aggregates.

Investigating aggregate morphology with holographic deconvolution microscopy is a useful complement to holographic characterization through Lorenz-Mie analysis. Whereas Lorenz-Mie fits proceed in a matter of milliseconds, however, Rayleigh-Sommerfeld back-propagation is hundreds of times slower. This study focuses, therefore, on the information that can be obtained rapidly through Lorenz-Mie Characterization.

EXAMPLES Material Preparation

Samples of bovine pancreas insulin (Mw: 5733.49 Da, Sigma-Aldrich, CAS number: 11070-73-8) were prepared according to previously published methods with modifications for investigating insulin aggregation induced by agitation alone. Insulin was dissolved at a concentration of 5 mg/ml in 10 mM Tris-HCl buffer (Life Technologies, CAS number 77-86-1) whose pH was adjusted to 7.4 with 37% hydrochloric acid (Sigma Aldrich, CAS number: 7647-01-0). The solution then was centrifuged at 250 rpm for 1 h to induce aggregation, at which time the sample still appeared substantially transparent.

Solutions of bovine serum albumin (BSA) (Mw: 66 500 Da, Sigma Aldrich, CAS number: 9048-46-8) were aggregated by complexation with poly(allylamine hydrochloride) (PAH) (Mw: 17 500 g/mol, CAS number: 71550-12-4, average degree of polymerization: 1207) [33, 34]. BSA and PAH were dissolved in 10 mM Tris buffer (Life Technologies, CAS number: 77-86-1) to achieve concentrations of 1.22 mg/ml and 0.03 mg/ml, respectively. The reagents were mixed by vortexing to ensure dissolution, and aggregates formed after the sample was allowed to equilibrate for one hour.

Additional samples were prepared under comparable conditions with the addition of 0.1 M NaCl (Sigma Aldrich, CAS number 7647-14-5) to facilitate complexation and thus to promote aggregation.

The standard Stoichiometric Mixture of Colloidal Spheres sample is a mixture of four populations of monodisperse colloidal spheres in which each population has a distinct mean size and composition. The monodisperse spheres were purchased from Bangs Laboratories as aqueous dispersions at 10% solids. Stock suspensions were diluted one-thousand-fold with deionized water and then were combined in equal volumes to create a heterogeneous mixture. The four populations in this mixture are polystyrene spheres of diameter 2a_(p)=0.71±0.09 μm (Catalog Code PS03N, Lot Number 9402) and 2a_(p)=1.58±0.14 μm (Catalog Code PS04N, Lot Number 9258), and silica spheres of diameter 2a_(p)=0.69±0.07 μm (Catalog Code SS03N, Lot Number 8933) and 2a_(p)=1.54±0.16 μm (Catalog Code SS04N, Lot Number 5305). The quoted range of particle size is estimated by the manufacturer using dynamic light scattering for the smaller spheres, and by the Coulter principle for the larger spheres.

Silicone spheres composed of polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) were synthesized by base catalyzed hydrolysis and copolymerization of difunctional diethoxydimethyl-silane (DEDMS) (Sigma-Aldrich, CAS number 78-62-6, 3 vol %) and trifunctional triethoxymethylsilane (TEMS) (Sigma-Aldrich, CAS number 2031-67-6, 2 vol %) following a standard protocol [Obey et al. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 1994, 163:454-463; Goller et al. Colloids Surfaces, 1997; 123-124:183-193.] A mixture of DEDMS and TEMS with 60:40 stoichiometry is added into deionized water (Millipore MilliQ, 93 vol %) at (28-30) wt % and ammonium hydroxide solution (ACROS Organics 2 vol %) to obtain a total volume of 10 ml. The sample was shaken vigorously with a vortexer for 4 min at room temperature to initiate nucleation, and then left to polymerize on a rotating frame at 10 rpm for three hours. Fully grown silicone spheres were then mixed with suspensions of protein aggregates at a volume fraction of 10-4 to obtain an effective concentration of spheres of 4×10⁶/ml.

These polymerized spheres share most properties with unpolymerized silicone oil droplets. Their mean refractive index, 1.388±0.002, exceeds that of DEDMS, 1.381, and TEMS, 1.383, as determined with an Abbe refractometer (Edmund Optics) and by holographic characterization.

Verification of Precision and Accuracy

The data in FIG. 3 were obtained by holographic characterization of a model colloidal dispersion consisting of a stoichiometric mixture of four distinct types of monodisperse colloidal spheres. Each of the four peaks in FIG. 3A represents the properties of one of those populations. In each case, the holographically measured distribution of properties is consistent with the manufacturer's specification. This agreement, together with complementary tests in previous publications, establishes the precision and accuracy of particle-resolved holographic characterization.

This data set also illustrates the unique ability of holographic characterization to characterize heterogeneous colloidal dispersions. Other techniques could have resolved the size distribution of any of the monodisperse colloidal components individually. No other technique, however, could have resolved the four populations in this mixture.

FIGS. 4A-4D offer an experimental demonstration of the range of particle sizes over which holographic characterization yields useful results. The 3 holograms presented here were recorded for 3 different polystyrene spheres dispersed in water, one with a radius of a_(p) ¼ 0.237 mm, at the small end of the technique's effective range, one with a radius of a_(p) ¼ 0.800 mm, and the third with a radius of a_(p) ¼ 10.47 mm. These measured holograms (FIG. 4A) are presented alongside corresponding pixel-by-pixel fits (FIG. 4B) to the predictions of the theory of light scattering, which are parameterized by each particle's 3-dimensional position, radius, and refractive index. The quality of a fit can be assessed by plotting the radial profile (FIG. 4C) of the normalized image intensity, b(r). This is obtained by averaging the 2-dimensional intensity pattern over angles around the center of the scattering pattern. Curves obtained from the measured data are plotted in FIG. 4D within shaded regions that represent measurement uncertainties. Curves obtained from the fits are overlaid on the experimental data for comparison. The fits track the experimental data extremely well over the entire range of particle sizes.

Characterization of Subvisible Insulin Aggregates

Although the bovine insulin sample appeared clear under visual inspection, the data in FIG. 2 reveal a concentration of (3.9±0.5)×10⁷ subvisible bovine insulin aggregates per milliliter, which corresponds to a volume fraction of roughly 10-3. Uncertainty in this value results from feature identification errors for the largest particles and uncertainty in the flow speed. Aggregates with radii smaller than 200 nm are not detected by the holographic characterization system and therefore were not counted in these totals. The distribution of particle characteristics is peaked at a radius of 1.6 μm, and is both broad and multimodal. No aggregates were recorded with radii exceeding 4.2 μm, which suggests that such large-scale aggregates are present at concentrations below 10⁴/ml.

The aggregates' refractive indexes vary over a wide range from just above that of the buffer, nm=1.335, to slightly more than 1.42. This range is significantly smaller than the value around 1.54 that would be expected for fully dense protein crystals. This observed upper limit is consistent, however, with recent index-matching measurements of the refractive index of protein aggregates. These latter measurements were performed by perfusing protein aggregates with index-matching fluid, and therefore yield an estimate for the refractive index of the protein itself. Holographic characterization, by contrast, analyzes an effective scatterer comprised of both the higher-index protein and also the lower-index buffer that fills out the sphere. It has been shown that such an effective sphere has an effective refractive index intermediate between that of the two media in a ratio that depends on the actual particle's porosity. More porous or open structures have smaller effective refractive indexes. The influence of porosity on the effective refractive index, furthermore, is found to be proportionally larger for particles with larger radii.

The effective sphere model account for general trends in the holographic characterization data under the assumption that the protein aggregates have open irregular structures. This proposal is consistent with previous ex situ studies that have demonstrated that bovine insulin forms filamentary aggregates.

The particular ability of holographic characterization to record both the size and the refractive index of individual colloidal particles therefore offers insights into protein aggregates' morphology in situ and without dilution and without any other special preparation. This capability also enables holographic characterization to distinguish protein aggregates from common contaminants such as silicone oil droplets and rubber particles, which pose problems for other analytical techniques.

Characterization of Subvisible BSA Aggregates

FIG. 5 shows comparable holographic characterization results for the two samples of bovine serum albumin. The data in FIG. 5A were obtained for the sample prepared without additional salt. As for the insulin sample, holographic characterization of the BSA sample reveals ±0.5×10⁶ aggregates/ml in the range of radii running from 300 nm to 2.5 μm, and a peak radius of 0.5 μm. No aggregates were observed with radii exceeding 2.8 μm, which suggests that larger aggregates are present at concentrations below 10⁴/ml.

The upper panel in FIG. 5A is a projection of the joint distribution, p(a_(p), n_(p)), into the distribution of aggregate sizes, p(a_(p)). This projection more closely resembles results provided by other size-measurement techniques, such as dynamic light scattering. Although the observed concentration of subvisible protein aggregates is below the detection threshold for DLS, DLS measurements reveal a concentration of roughly 109 aggregates/ml whose radii are smaller than 100 nm, and thus are too small for holographic characterization. As for the BI samples, the anticorrelation between a_(p) and n_(p) evident in FIGS. 5A-5F suggests that BSA-PAH complexes have an open structure. This is consistent with previous ex situ studies that demonstrate that BSA aggregates into weakly branched structures.

Adding salt enhances complexation and increases the mean aggregate size by nearly a factor of two, and also substantially broadens the distribution of aggregate sizes, These trends can be seen in FIG. 5B. FIGS. 5A-5F also include projections of the relative probability densities, p(a_(p)), that emphasize how aggregates' size distribution changes with growth conditions. What these projections omit is the striking change in the joint distribution of aggregate radii and refractive indexes from FIG. 5A to FIG. 5B. This shift suggests that the larger aggregates grown in the presence of added salt are substantially more porous. This insight into the aggregates' morphology would not be offered by the size distributions alone.

Role of Aggregate Morphology Microflow Imaging

FIGS. 4A-4D present direct comparisons between holographic characterization and MFI for a representative sample of 6 BSA-PAH complexes whose morphologies range from nearly spherical compact clusters to extended spindly structures. Each aggregate's hologram is compared with a nonlinear least-squares fit to the predictions of Lorenz-Mie theory. The reduced X² statistic for these fits is used to arrange the results from best fits at the top to worst fits at the bottom. Each of the measured holograms also is used to reconstruct a volumetric image of the individual aggregate through Rayleigh-Sommerfeld deconvolution microscopy. The size of the reconstructed cluster then can be compared with the effective radius obtained from holographic characterization.

Even the two most compact clusters in FIG. 4A appear to be substantially aspherical. Their holograms, nevertheless, are very well reproduced by the nonlinear fits. The X² metrics for these fits are close to unity, suggesting that the model adequately describes the light-scattering process and that the single-pixel noise is well estimated. Values for the aggregate radius are consistent with the size estimated from Rayleigh-Sommerfeld reconstruction. Circles with the holographically determined radii are superimposed on the numerically refocused bright-field images in FIG. 4D for comparison. This success is consistent with previous comparisons of Lorenz-Mie and Rayleigh-Sommerfeld analyses for colloidal spheres and colloidal rods.

Errors increase as aggregates become increasingly highly structured and asymmetric. Even so, estimates for the characteristic size are in reasonable agreement with the apparent size of the bright-field reconstructions even for the worst case. This robustness arises because the effective size of the scatterer strongly influences the size and contrast of the central scattering peak and the immediately surrounding intensity minimum. Faithful fits in this region of the interference pattern therefore yield reasonable values for the scatterer's size. The overall contrast of the pattern as a whole encodes the scatterer's refractive index, and, thus, is very low for such open-structured clusters.

These representative examples are consistent with earlier demonstrations that holographic characterization yields useful characterization data for imperfect spheres and aspherical particles. Particularly for larger aggregates, the estimated value for the refractive index describes an effective sphere. The estimated radius, however, is a reasonably robust metric for the aggregate's size.

Independent of the ability of holographic characterization to provide insight into morphology, these results demonstrate that holographic microscopy usefully detects and counts subvisible protein aggregates in solution. These detections by themselves provide information that is useful for characterizing the state of aggregation of the protein solution in situ without requiring extensive sample preparation. Holographic microscopy's large effective depth of field then serves to increase the analysis rate relative to conventional particle imaging analysis.

Like holographic characterization, MFI yields particle-resolved radius measurements that can be used to calculate the concentration of particles in specified size bins. These results may be compared directly with projected size distributions produced by holographic characterization. The data in FIGS. 8A-8B show such a comparison for the BSA-PAH complexes with and without added salt featured in FIG. 5C-5D. Results are presented as the number, N(a_(p)), of aggregates per milliliter in a size range of ±100 nm around the center of each bin in a_(p). The holographic characterization data from FIGS. 5B and 5D are rescaled in this plot for comparison. Independent studies demonstrate that MFI analysis yields reliable size estimates for aggregates with radii larger than 1 nm. Diffraction causes substantial measurement errors for smaller particles. We, therefore, collect MFI results for smaller particles into 600-nm wide bins in FIGS. 8A and 8B, with corresponding normalization. The lower end of this bin's range corresponds with the smallest radii reported by holographic characterization. Agreement between holographic characterization and MFI is reasonably good over the entire range of particle sizes plotted. Both techniques yield consistent values for the overall concentration of 10⁷ aggregates/mL. MFI systematically reports larger numbers of aggregates on the large end of the size range and fewer on the small end. This difference can be attributed to the most elongated and irregular aggregates, such as the last example in FIGS. 4A-4D, whose size is underestimated by holographic characterization. This effect of morphology on holographic size characterization has been discussed previously. Even in these cases, holographic characterization correctly detects the particles' presence and identifies them as micrometer-scale objects. Both MFI and holographic characterization yield consistent results for the total number density of aggregates.

For particles on the smaller end of the size range, MFI provides particle counts but no useful characterization data. Holographic characterization, by contrast, offers reliable size estimates in this regime. Over the entire range of sizes considered, holographic characterization also provides estimates for particles' refractive indexes.

Dynamic Light Scattering

To verify the presence of subvisible protein aggregates in our samples, we also performed DLS measurements. Whereas holographic characterization and MFI yield particle-resolved measurements, DLS is a bulk characterization technique. Values reported by DLS reflect the percentage, P(a_(h)), of scattered light that may be attributed to objects of a given hydrodynamic radius, an. The resulting size distribution therefore is weighted by the objects' light-scattering characteristics. Scattering intensities can be translated at least approximately into particle concentrations if the particles are smaller than the wavelength of light and if they all have the same refractive index. Direct comparisons are not possible when particles' refractive indexes vary with size, as is the case for protein aggregates. In such cases, DLS is useful for confirming the presence of scatterers within a range of sizes. FIG. 6 presents DLS data for the same samples of BSA-PAH complexes presented in FIG. 3. For both samples, DLS reveals the presence of an abundance of scatterers with radii smaller than 100 nm. The detection threshold of DLS for scatterers of this size is roughly 10⁸ aggregates/mL, as determined by independent studies. We conclude that both samples have at least this concentration of submicrometer-diameter aggregates. Such objects are smaller than the detection limit for our implementation of holographic video microscopy and so were not resolved in FIG. 3.

The distribution shifts to larger sizes in the sample with added salt, consistent with the results of holographic characterization. Both samples show a very small signal, indicated by an arrow in FIG. 9, for subvisible objects whose hydrodynamic radius is 2.8 nm. This confirms the presence of such scatterers in our sample at a concentration just barely above the detection threshold of DLS for objects of that size.

The sample with added salt also has a clear peak around a_(h)=400±20 nm that is in the detection range of holographic characterization. The corresponding peak in FIG. 5C appears at a substantially larger radius, a_(p)=770±20 nm. One likely source of this discrepancy is that holographic characterization reports the radius of an effective bounding sphere, whereas DLS reports the hydrodynamic radius, which can be substantially smaller for open structures. Another contributing factor is that larger aggregates have lower effective refractive indexes and thus scatter light proportionately less strongly than smaller aggregates. This effect also shifts the apparent size distribution downward in DLS measurements. It does not, however, affect holographic characterization, which reports both the size and refractive index of each object independently.

Holographic Differentiation of Silicone Spheres from Protein Aggregates

DLS cannot distinguish protein aggregates from other populations of particles in suspension. MFI can differentiate some such contaminants by morphology: silicone droplets, for example, tend to be spherical, whereas protein aggregates tend to have irregular shapes. Morphological differentiation works best for particles that are substantially larger than the wavelength of light, whose structural features are not obscured by diffraction. Through the information it provides on individual particles' refractive indexes, holographic characterization offers an additional avenue for distinguishing micrometer-scale objects by composition. We demonstrate this capability by performing holographic characterization measurements on BSA samples that are deliberately adulterated with silicone spheres.

Holographic Characterization of Silicone Spheres

FIGS. 10A-10B show holographic characterization data for silicone spheres dispersed in deionized water. The sample in FIG. 10A is comparatively monodisperse with a sample-averaged radius of 0.75±0.09 nm. The particles in FIG. 10B are drawn from a broader distribution of sizes, with a mean radius of 0.87±0.28 nm. Both samples of spheres have refractive indexes consistent with previously reported values for polydimethylsiloxane with 40% crosslinking, n_(p)=1.388±0.005. This range is indicated with a shaded region in FIGS. 10A-10B.

Unlike the protein aggregates, these particles' refractive indexes are uncorrelated with their sizes. This is most easily seen in the polydisperse sample in FIG. 10B and is consistent with the droplets having uniform density and no porosity. We expect to see the same distribution of single-particle properties when these silicone spheres are codispersed with protein aggregates.

Differential Detection of Silicone Spheres

The data in FIG. 11A were obtained from a sample of BSA prepared under the same conditions as FIG. 5A but with the addition of monodisperse silicone spheres at a concentration of 4×106 particles/mL. The resulting distribution of particle properties is clearly bimodal with one population resembling that obtained from protein aggregates alone and the other having a refractive index consistent with that of the silicone spheres, n_(p)=1.388±0.005. The sample in FIG. 11B similarly were prepared under conditions comparable to those from FIG. 5C with the addition of polydisperse silicone spheres from the sample in FIG. 10B. Consistency between features associated with protein aggregates in FIGS. 5A-5D and FIGS. 11A-11B demonstrate that both the sample preparation protocol and also the holographic characterization technique yield reproducible results from sample to sample, and that holographic characterization of protein aggregates is not influenced by the presence of extraneous impurity particles.

Interestingly, both distributions feature a small peak around a_(p)=2.8 nm that corresponds to the peak in the DLS data from FIG. 9. This feature is not present in FIGS. 3A-3F. It is likely that this very small population of larger aggregates was present in those samples but at a concentration just below the threshold for detection in a 10-min measurement.

The distributions of features associated with silicone droplets in FIGS. 11A-11B also agree well with the holographic characterization data on the droplets alone from FIGS. 10A-10B. These results demonstrate that the refractive-index data from holographic characterization can be useful for distinguishing protein aggregates from silicone oil droplets. Such differentiation would not be possible on the basis of the size distribution alone, as can be seen from the projected data in FIGS. 11A-11D.

Holographic characterization cannot differentiate silicone droplets from protein clusters whose refractive index is the same as silicone's. Such ambiguity arises for the smallest particles analyzed in FIGS. 11A-11D. Spherical silicone droplets sometimes can be distinguished from irregularly shaped protein aggregates under these conditions using morphological data obtained through deconvolution analysis of the same holograms. The distinction in these cases still would be less clear than can be obtained with Resonant Mass Measurement (RMM), which differentiates silicone from protein by the sign of their relative buoyancies. In cases where specific particles cannot be differentiated unambiguously, the presence of silicone droplets still can be inferred from holographic characterization data because such particles create a cluster in the (a_(p), n_(y)) plane whose refractive index is independent of size. The relative abundances of the two populations then can be inferred, for example, by statistical clustering methods.

Discussion of Example Results

As an optical probe of protein aggregate properties, holographic characterization is orthogonal to such non-optical techniques as the Coulter principle or Resonant Mass Measurement (RMM). As an imaging technique, it is related to Micro-Flow Imaging (MFI) and Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis (NTA). Holographic characterization benefits, however, from its large effective depth of field and its ability to monitor refractive index as well as size. Because MFI and holographic characterization can analyze a single particle with a single snapshot, both are inherently faster than NTA, which relies on time-series analysis.

Holographic characterization also is related to light-scattering techniques such as dynamic light scattering (DLS) and light obscuration (LO). It offers greater counting sensitivity for micrometer-scale objects than dynamic light scattering, and access to smaller particles than light obscuration, without requiring dilution. Unlike other scattering techniques, holographic characterization does not require the particles' refractive indexes as inputs, but rather provides the refractive index as an output.

Comparisons among these techniques are summarized in Table 1, which is a comparison of high-throughput characterization techniques for subvisible protein aggregates. The size range refers to the radius of the effective sphere detected by each method. The fourth column indicates whether the technique is capable of measuring aggregate morphology. References describe independent assessments of techniques' capabilities for characterizing protein aggregates.

TABLE I Method Size [μm] Number/ml Morphology Comments Holographic Characterization 0.3-10   10⁴-10⁸ Yes Measures both size and refractive index. Does not require calibration standards. Differentiates by size and composition. Dynamic Light Scattering (DLS) 0.001-1     10⁸-10¹⁰ No Sample-averaged measurement. No differentiation. Electric Sensing Zone (ESZ) 0.1-1600    1-10⁵ No Requires compatible electrolyte. Coulter Principle Typically requires sample dilution. Requires calibration with size standards. Size range determined by orifice selection. No differentiation. Light Obscuration (LO) 1-200 10³-10⁵ No Typically requires sample dilution. Sensitive to refractive index variations. Requires calibration with size standards. No differentiation. Dynamic Imaging Analysis (DIA) 1-400 10⁴-10⁸ Yes Differentiation based on morphology Micro-Flow Imaging (MFI) rather than composition. Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis 0.03-1    10⁷-10⁹ No Measurement time increases with particle radius. (NTA) No differentiation. Resonant Mass Measurement 0.3-4    10⁸-10⁹ No Particle size estimated indirectly from mass. (RMM) Archimedes Differentiates between positively and negatively buoyant particles.

The measurements presented here demonstrate that holographic video microscopy together with Lorenz-Mie analysis can detect, count and characterize subvisible protein aggregates. Data acquisition is rapid, typically taking no more than 15 min, and requires no special sample preparation. One implementation is effective for aggregates ranging in radius from 300 nm to 10 μm and at concentrations from 10⁴ aggregates/ml to 10⁸ aggregates/ml. The same holograms used for characterization measurements also can be interpreted to estimate the morphology of individual protein aggregates through numerical back-propagation. Calibration is straightforward, requiring only the laser wavelength, the microscope's magnification and the medium's refractive index. It is believe that such holographic characterization of protein aggregates will be useful for assessing the stability of biopharmaceutical formulations, for process control during manufacturing, and for quality assurance both at the point of sale, and also potentially at the point of use.

Anticorrelation Between Aggregate Size and Refractive Index

As noted above, there is an observed strong anticorrelation between aggregate size and refractive index revealed in FIGS. 5A, 5C, and 5E. Such would not have been detected by any prior art particle-characterization technique. The values for the single-particle refractive index, moreover, are substantially smaller than the value of roughly 1.45 that would be expected for proteins at the imaging wavelength. Indeed, the estimated refractive index for the largest particles is not much larger than that of water, 1.335.

Anticorrelation between size and refractive index together with low values for refractive index have been identified as hallmarks of particle porosity. Rather than being homogeneously porous, however, it is believed that protein aggregates will have the fractal structure that arises naturally through growth by aggregation.

To test this idea, a protein aggregate was modeled as a fractal cluster of fractal dimension D. The fractal model was selected for its known relation to the geometry of random aggregates and for simplicity due to reliance on a single parameter, fractal dimension D, for predicting density. One of skill in the art will appreciate that other appropriate models can be used to predict properties of the protein aggregate, including density. The volume fraction ϕ of proteins of radius a₀ within an aggregate of radius a_(p) therefore is

$\begin{matrix} {{\phi\left( a_{p} \right)} = {\left( \frac{a_{0}}{a_{p}} \right)^{2 - p}.}} & (1) \end{matrix}$

This proportion of the cluster is composed of a material with refractive index no. The remainder of the volume presumably is filled with the fluid medium, which has a lower refractive index, n_(m). The apparent refractive index, n_(p) of the particle as a whole is given by effective medium theory f(n _(p))=ϕf(n ₀)+(1−ϕ)f(n _(m)),  (2) where the Lorenz-Lorentz factor is

$\begin{matrix} {{f(n)} = {\frac{n^{2} - 1}{n^{2} + 2}.}} & (3) \end{matrix}$ From this,

$\begin{matrix} {{\ln\left( \frac{{f\left( n_{p} \right)} - {f\left( n_{m} \right)}}{{f\left( n_{0} \right)} - {f\left( n_{m} \right)}} \right)} = {\left( {3 - D} \right){{\ln\left( \frac{a_{0}}{a_{p}} \right)}.}}} & (4) \end{matrix}$

Even if n₀ and a₀ are not known independently, this scaling relation provides a means to characterize the morphology of a population of aggregates by estimating the ensemble-averaged fractal dimension.

The data in FIGS. 6A-6B show the results of such an analysis. FIG. 6A compiles all of the data from FIGS. 5A, 5C, and 5E under the assumption that the same morphology would arise under all three sets of growth conditions. This assumption is borne out in FIG. 6B which shows the same data plotted according to the scaling relation in Eq. (4). In particular, the linear trend in FIG. 6B supports the assumptions underlying Eq. (4), including the assumption that the three populations of aggregates have consistent growth habits.

Dashed lines superimposed on the data in FIG. 6B indicate slopes consistent with D=1, 1.2 and 1.4, with best agreement being obtained for D=1.2. This result suggests that the BSA aggregates are filamentary, with few branches. The fractal model may be used for dense blobs (D=3), linear chains (D=1) as well as structures in between (typically D>3>1). The holograms' apparent spherical symmetry therefore suggests that the aggregates are composed of clusters of filaments. This is consistent with electron microscopy studies of BSA aggregation under comparable conditions. Estimating the fractal dimension through holographic characterization improves upon electron microscopy because it can be performed in situ and does not entail any of the structural transformations inherent in sample preparation. Holographic characterization also offers advantages over conventional light scattering because it does not require estimates for the monomer refractive index. All of the calibration data required for the measurement is available from single-particle characterization data and the overall calibration of the instrument.

The success of this scaling analysis provides additional evidence that the holographically estimated values for the radius and refractive index of individual protein aggregates accurately reflects the aggregates' actual properties. This result is not unreasonable given the observed symmetry of single-aggregate holograms, such as the example in FIG. 1A, and their amenability to fitting with the Lorenz-Mie result for ideal spheres. These observations then suggest that holographic characterization can be effective for analyzing the properties of individual protein aggregates and therefore for assessing the properties of dispersions of protein aggregates. Beyond providing information on the size distribution of protein aggregates, holographic characterization also offers insights into composition and morphology through the refractive index.

The information provided by holographic characterization should provide useful feedback for formulating protein dispersions, particularly in applications where the size of aggregates must be monitored and limited. Real-time implementations of holographic characterization similarly should be useful for process control and quality assurance in such applications.

Differentiation

FIGS. 5A, 5C, and 5E illustrate the ability, in one embodiment, of systems and methods described herein to provide differentiation. In this context, “differentiation” is the ability to distinguish a desired material, such as protein aggregates, from other materials in a suspension. The refractive index data provided by holographic characterization can be used to distinguish protein aggregates from contaminants such as silicone droplets. This is important because contaminants, including silicone droplets and rubber particles, often find their way into protein solutions and can be mistaken for protein aggregates by other characterization techniques. Such misidentification can suggest that there is a problem with the product, when no problem exists, or fail to identify a contaminated batch of product.

Further, FIGS. 12A-12C illustrate human IgG, silicone oil and then the two combined in one sample. As can be seen, the protein aggregates (FIG. 12A) and the silicone oil (FIG. 12B) have very different signatures and are clearly distinguishable when they are in the same sample (FIG. 12C). The silicone oil signature is a textbook example holographic characterization of oil emulsions while the protein can be readily distinguished.

Using systems and methods described herein, one can differentiate objects by their refractive indexes, which is a unique capability. Thus, the differentiation is by the actual composition, to which the refractive index is directly related, rather than some other aspect such as morphology (which may be the same for different materials, thus given false results, either false positive or false negative). For example, one popular technique uses morphology to distinguish silicone from protein, under the assumption that silicone droplets are spherical and protein aggregates are not. However, this assumption fails in a number of important scenarios, including for small protein aggregates where the size is below the ability of the technique to differentiate them from spheres.

Computer Implementation

As shown in FIG. 7, e.g., a computer-accessible medium 120 (e.g., as described herein, a storage device such as a hard disk, floppy disk, memory stick, CD-ROM, RAM, ROM, etc., or a collection thereof) can be provided (e.g., in communication with the processing arrangement 110). The computer-accessible medium 120 may be a non-transitory computer-accessible medium. The computer-accessible medium 120 can contain executable instructions 130 thereon. In addition or alternatively, a storage arrangement 140 can be provided separately from the computer-accessible medium 120, which can provide the instructions to the processing arrangement 110 so as to configure the processing arrangement to execute certain exemplary procedures, processes and methods, as described herein, for example. The instructions may include a plurality of sets of instructions. For example, in some implementations, the instructions may include instructions for applying radio frequency energy in a plurality of sequence blocks to a volume, where each of the sequence blocks includes at least a first stage. The instructions may further include instructions for repeating the first stage successively until magnetization at a beginning of each of the sequence blocks is stable, instructions for concatenating a plurality of imaging segments, which correspond to the plurality of sequence blocks, into a single continuous imaging segment, and instructions for encoding at least one relaxation parameter into the single continuous imaging segment.

System 100 may also include a display or output device, an input device such as a key-board, mouse, touch screen or other input device, and may be connected to additional systems via a logical network. Many of the embodiments described herein may be practiced in a networked environment using logical connections to one or more remote computers having processors. Logical connections may include a local area network (LAN) and a wide area network (WAN) that are presented here by way of example and not limitation. Such networking environments are commonplace in office-wide or enterprise-wide computer networks, intranets and the Internet and may use a wide variety of different communication protocols. Those skilled in the art can appreciate that such network computing environments can typically encompass many types of computer system configurations, including personal computers, hand-held devices, multi-processor systems, microprocessor-based or programmable consumer electronics, network PCs, minicomputers, mainframe computers, and the like. Embodiments of the invention may also be practiced in distributed computing environments where tasks are performed by local and remote processing devices that are linked (either by hardwired links, wireless links, or by a combination of hardwired or wireless links) through a communications network. In a distributed computing environment, program modules may be located in both local and remote memory storage devices.

Various embodiments are described in the general context of method steps, which may be implemented in one embodiment by a program product including computer-executable instructions, such as program code, executed by computers in networked environments. Generally, program modules include routines, programs, objects, components, data structures, etc. that perform particular tasks or implement particular abstract data types. Computer-executable instructions, associated data structures, and program modules represent examples of program code for executing steps of the methods disclosed herein. The particular sequence of such executable instructions or associated data structures represents examples of corresponding acts for implementing the functions described in such steps.

Software and web implementations of the present invention could be accomplished with standard programming techniques with rule based logic and other logic to accomplish the various database searching steps, correlation steps, comparison steps and decision steps. It should also be noted that the words “component” and “module,” as used herein and in the claims, are intended to encompass implementations using one or more lines of software code, and/or hardware implementations, and/or equipment for receiving manual inputs.

With respect to the use of substantially any plural and/or singular terms herein, those having skill in the art can translate from the plural to the singular and/or from the singular to the plural as is appropriate to the context and/or application. The various singular/plural permutations may be expressly set forth herein for the sake of clarity.

The foregoing description of illustrative embodiments has been presented for purposes of illustration and of description. It is not intended to be exhaustive or limiting with respect to the precise form disclosed, and modifications and variations are possible in light of the above teachings or may be acquired from practice of the disclosed embodiments. Therefore, the above embodiments should not be taken as limiting the scope of the invention. 

What is claimed is:
 1. A method of characterizing a sample of plurality of protein aggregates, comprising: flowing the sample through an observation volume of a holographic microscope; generating a first set of holograms based upon holographic video microscopy of a protein aggregate Pn of the first set of protein aggregates within the observation volume at a first time; characterizing each of the protein aggregates of the first set of protein aggregates as a sphere; determining the refractive index and the radius for characterized sphere of the first set of protein aggregates generating a second set of holograms based upon holographic video microscopy of a second set of protein aggregates within the observation volume at a second time; characterizing each of the protein aggregates of the second set of protein aggregate as a sphere; and determining the refractive index and the radius for each of the protein aggregates of the second set of protein aggregates wherein the characterizing of each of the protein aggregates of the first set and the second set further comprises modeling each of the protein aggregates of the first set and of the second set as a fractal cluster of fractal dimension D where: with Ø being a volume fraction of proteins, a₀ being the protein radius, and a_(p) being the protein aggregate radius.
 2. The method of claim 1 further wherein the volume fraction of protein has a reflective index of n₀ and a remainder volume is a fluid medium with a refractive index of n_(m), yielding an apparent refractive index of n_(p) for the protein aggregate.
 3. The method of claim 1, further comprising characterizing the morphology of the first set of protein aggregates and the second set of protein aggregates based upon estimating an ensemble-averaged fractal dimension.
 4. The method of claim 1, wherein estimating the ensemble-averaged fractal dimension comprises: ${\ln\left( \frac{{f\left( n_{p} \right)} - {f\left( n_{m} \right)}}{{f\left( n_{0} \right)} - {f\left( n_{m} \right)}} \right)} = {\left( {3 - D} \right){\ln\begin{pmatrix} a_{0} \\ a_{p} \end{pmatrix}}}$ where: f(n_(p)) = ϕ f(n₀) + (1 − ϕ)f(n_(m)) and ${f(n)} = {\frac{n^{2} - 1}{n^{2} + 2}.}$
 5. The method of claim 1, further comprising monitoring synthesis of the plurality of particles based upon comparison of the first particle refractive index and radius and the second particle refractive index and radius.
 6. The method of claim 1, further comprising, wherein flowing the sample is at a rate of up to 100 μm s⁻¹.
 7. The method of claim 1, further comprising prior to generating the first set of holograms, adding salt.
 8. The method of claim 1 wherein determining the refractive index and the radius comprises application of Lorenz-Mie theory.
 9. The method of claim 5, further comprising determining whether synthesis of the plurality of particles has concluded.
 10. The method of claim 1, wherein determining the refractive index and the radius of the protein aggregates of the first set of protein aggregates and determining the refractive index and the radius of the protein aggregates of the second set of protein aggregates comprise determining a probability density for refractive index and radius of the protein aggregates of the first set of protein aggregates and determining a probability density for refractive index and radius of the protein aggregates of the second set of protein aggregates, respectively.
 11. The method of claim 1, wherein at least one protein aggregate is present in both the first set of protein aggregates and the second set of protein aggregates and further wherein the trajectory of the at least one protein aggregate is determined.
 12. A computer-implemented machine for characterizing a plurality of protein aggregates, comprising: a processor; B a holographic microscope comprising a coherent light, a specimen stage having an observation volume, an objective lens, and an image collection device, the holographic microscope in communication with the processor; and a tangible computer-readable medium operatively connected to the processor and including computer code configured to: flow the sample through an observation volume of a holographic microscope; generate a first set of holograms based upon holographic video microscopy of a protein aggregate Pn of the first set of protein aggregates within the observation volume at a first time; characterize each of the protein aggregates of the first set of protein aggregates as a sphere; determine the refractive index and the radius for characterized sphere of the first set of protein aggregates generate a second set of holograms based upon holographic video microscopy of a second set of protein aggregates within the observation volume at a second time; characterize each of the protein aggregates of the second set of protein aggregate as a sphere; and determine the refractive index and the radius for each of the protein aggregates of the second set of protein aggregates wherein the characterizing of each of the protein aggregates of the first set and the second set further comprises modeling each of the protein aggregates of the first set and of the second set as a fractal cluster of fractal dimension D where: ${\phi\left( a_{p} \right)} = \left( \frac{a_{0}}{a_{p}} \right)^{3 - D}$ with Ø being a volume fraction of proteins, a₀ being the protein radius, and a_(p) being the protein aggregate radius.
 13. The computer-implemented machine of claim 12, further wherein the volume fraction of protein has a reflective index of n₀ and a remainder volume is a fluid medium with a refractive index of n_(m), yielding an apparent refractive index of n_(p) for the protein aggregate.
 14. The computer-implemented machine of claim 12, further wherein the tangible computer readable medium includes computer code to characterize the morphology of the first set of protein aggregates and the second set of protein aggregates based upon estimating an ensemble-averaged fractal dimension.
 15. The computer-implemented machine of claim 12, wherein estimating the ensemble-averaged fractal dimension comprises: ${\ln\left( \frac{{f\left( n_{p} \right)} - {f\left( n_{m} \right)}}{{f\left( n_{0} \right)} - {f\left( n_{m} \right)}} \right)} = {\left( {3 - D} \right){\ln\left( \frac{a_{0}}{a_{p}} \right)}}$ where: f(n _(p))=Øf(n ₀)+(1−Ø)f(n _(m)) and ${f(n)} = {\frac{n^{2} - 1}{n^{2} + 2}.}$
 16. The computer-implemented machine of claim 12, further wherein the tangible computer readable medium includes computer code to monitor synthesis of the plurality of particles based upon comparison of the first particle refractive index and radius and the second particle refractive index and radius.
 17. The computer-implemented machine of claim 16, further wherein the tangible computer readable medium includes computer code to determine whether synthesis of the plurality of particles has concluded.
 18. The computer-implemented machine of claim 12, further comprising, wherein flowing the sample is at a rate of up to 100 μm s⁻¹.
 19. The computer-implemented machine of claim 12, further wherein the tangible computer readable medium includes computer code to, prior to generating the first set of holograms, adding salt.
 20. The computer-implemented machine of claim 12 wherein determining the refractive index and the radius comprises application of Lorenz-Mie theory. 